Friday, February 1, 2019

I'm not sure how much impact Andrew Wilson's article in The National on indyref timing will have, because we all know where he's coming from, so his views are already factored in - a bit like Jim Sillars (not that there's much comparison between the two men in any other sense). But I do think it's important to challenge the specific arguments for a potentially indefinite delay whenever they are put forward.

There's always a question mark over the motivations of those who wouldn't mind the indyref issue going away for the foreseeable future - is it because their real interest is in maintaining the SNP as a party of power within the devolved system (and they think pushing for independence makes that harder), or do they genuinely think that waiting will maximise the chances of Scotland becoming independent in the long run? If we take Andrew at his word and assume it's the latter, what's missing from his article is an acknowledgement that using the mandate for a pre-2021 referendum isn't just about pragmatic considerations of when independence is most likely to be won. It's also effectively about honouring a contract with voters, who were invited to vote SNP in both 2016 and 2017 on the specific basis that they would be given a choice on Scotland's future in the event of Brexit. Giving people the choice at the time they asked for it, not at a far-distant time that might suit certain politicians better, should be regarded as a good thing in itself. What people do with that choice is up to them.

Then we come to the hoary old point about whether we need to have 60% support for Yes in the polls before calling a referendum - an arbitrary and utterly unattainable target figure that is effectively an argument for never holding a referendum and for Scotland never becoming an independent country. Andrew is rather elliptical on that point in his article, and that's probably intentional. On the one hand he makes the entirely sensible observation that "the polls will lag until the question is ready to be put", which on the face of it is an acknowledgement that any large shifts of public opinion are only likely to occur after a referendum is actually called, and that therefore sub-50 (let alone sub-60) showings for Yes in the polls should not be used as an argument for delay. But then he moves straight back to utopia-chasing by saying that "our focus must turn to those who need persuaded to get the coalition for Yes comfortably over 50% and towards 60% and beyond", which sounds very much like "we must not act until that happens", and which amounts to "we must not act at all". Of course, he could be saying that we should be ready to push towards 60% support once the campaign is actually underway, but why would we need to do that, when 50% + 1 is enough? It doesn't make sense.

So on balance this does look like another outing for the "60% threshold for calling an indyref". If so, I'm not surprised Andrew shied away from stating it directly, because it really is pretty silly.

* * *

The Telegraph said yesterday that the SNP had secured a majority for their Budget with the help of the "hard-left Greens". That echoes the words of Willie Rennie a few weeks ago, who said that the SNP were turning to the "hard-left" rather than reaching a sensible deal with a mainstream party like the Liberal Democrats (ahem). But this ignores the fact that the SNP were open to doing a budget deal with pretty much any party, and that the unionist parties made that impossible by setting ludicrous conditions. The Lib Dems themselves, for example, laid down an absolute precondition that the SNP would have to temporarily take their push for independence off the table, which is a bit like telling the Lib Dems they have to temporarily stop believing in liberalism, or telling the Tories they have to temporarily stop believing in free-market capitalism.

It's really simple, guys: if you think a "hard-left" deal is bad for Scotland, negotiate in good faith and don't leave a deal with the Greens as the only remaining practical option. The unionist parties are effectively the midwives of this deal.

* * *

Scot Goes Pop fundraiser: If you'd like to help this blog continue during what could be an epic few months ahead, just a reminder that last year's fundraiser is still very much open for donations, and hasn't reached the target figure yet.

Yes. If they don't, they run the risk of voters feeling they are not the party to vote for if an indyref wanted. Under PR, this could quickly lose you votes to e.g. the Greens or a new 'SIP'. While PR means the overall share of MSPs for Yes parties is notably less likely to be heavily impacted (than say under FPTP), it would mean the SNP losing seats.

This is also why 'refusal of a section 30' - or specifically any attempt to block a democratic move to independence by Westminster - would be England ending democracy in the UK. It would be exactly the same as making left wing labour or liberal democractic core policy illegal, i.e. people are unable to vote for it. The end of democracy.

For the UK to be a democracy, Scots must be able to freely vote e.g. SNP with the latter able to hold an iref should they be able to get a parliamentary majority for it.

Yep. They said they'd do it, so they better just do it or else how are people meant to trust their manifesto pledges in future? The party leadership might think that's unfair but they (correctly by the way) regularly allude to the fact that Labour has routinely failed to come through on promised constitutional reform (such as abolition of the House of Lords).

The media continually go on about the lost SNP votes in GE 2017. I'm fairly sure that the reason that there was a decrease in the vote was due to the lack of commitment to an Indy Ref, people just couldn't be bothered to get out and vote for a parliament where we'll never be allowed to achieve anything of substance. If we don't get started soon, preferably with substantive back from the EU, then the "the times not right" brigade will have managed to achieve their own self fulfilling prophecy. People don't want to vote for sheep.

This is correct. The turnout shot up 7% in 2015 as Scots voted to have a say in the running of the UK, as promised in the 2014 unionist vow.

Of course England dumped the vow immediately and treated Scots like lepers, with EVEL introduced to make officially the English parliament. So quickly Scots realized it was all shite. This landed the SNP a higher vote share in the 2016 Scottish elections + a good share for the Greens as the population asked for a new iref. When the 2017 English elections came around, loads of Scots SNP/Green voters didn't even bother to vote as their was no point, hence the turnout fell by 5%.

If the SNP do not call a referendum then I will be changing to the greens. Many of us who support the SNP do so by 'lending' our vote to them. There are many things the SNP have done that I do not particularly like but they get my vote as I want independence. take that away then I will go with my heart - I am sure others will.

If the unionist parties give up their stay with the union mantra then we might think about it ha ha ha no we won't bunch of diddies, our reason for being is independence take that away and we are no longer their.

Before Brexit came along and Westminster descended into the political madness that has ensued I may well have gone along with what Andrew Wilson touted in his column. Now, however, with No Deal on the horizon and the previously unthinkable prospect of Martial Law being a very real consideration I'm more inclined towards the "act now" school of thought.

I'm of an age where if we rumble along gently hoping for optimum conditions and "cooperation" from outside agencies then independence is really no more than a pipe dream for me. So all things considered my view is make the effort and if we don't get the level of support that I anticipate the issue will at least have been tested for my lifespan.

In that event I'm too old to be an attractive prospect as an emigrant to any country that I'd consider moving to, so I'll just have to sit back in my corner and shout at the telly.

I see that the Brits are getting all flustered over Gibraltar being described as a 'colony'; something it was until 2002.

Of course Scotland isn't a colony. Not if it can freely choose independence at any time. That used to be via Scots MPs in london, now it's through Holyrood by convention.

If a Section 30 is refused, then Scotland would be a colony:

"A country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country.

If Scotland is free to leave the UK, no matter how much we complain about Westminster, it's not a colony. Westminster could end devolution tomorrow and that wouldn't be colonial. Not if Scotland can just freely go for independence in response. If Scotland can freely leave the UK, then it is ultimately in control of itself; it's just chosen to let London run lots of stuff and crap on it from a great height as it sees fit.

Nope, we are only a colony if we can't freely vote to leave.

If a Section 30 is refused, Scotland officially becomes an English colony, or at least England would be a foregin colonial aggressor trying to make Scotland a colony. There would be no arguing otherwise.

Unionists better absolutely hope that, just as in 2014, a Section 30 is granted automatically upon request. That preserves the union. Refusal ends the union and imposes colonialism.

It can, Scotland can hold a referendum tomorrow and become Independent from that if that is what the electorate decide that, no section 30 needed. Or it could declare UDI. Of course the international community might not recognize a Indy Scotland formed from a non section 30 ref, or UDI but that's a separate matter.

"If Scotland is free to leave the UK, no matter how much we complain about Westminster, it's not a colony."

It's only if a Section 30 is refused - i.e. England ends democracy and claims Scotland can't vote legally for independence until such time as it might grant permission - do we enter colony status, complete with troops on the ground at various bases.

I've said numerous times I don't believe this will happen; it didn't in 2014 for all the bluster. However, it is unionists who keep saying that Westminster can say no, i.e. they are claiming Scotland is a colony. Seemed to me it was just a formality last time to keep everthing legally tight, so that's not true. Let's hope the nats like me are right and the unionists are wrong eh! Your beloved union would die instantly if it's not voluntary.

While I imagine you'd rather there wasn't another iref GWC, I'm sure in your heart you'd not see democracy ended to prevent one. The unity comes from people voting for your union, not from being held in it against their will. I'm sure the 55% in 2014 swelled you with pride, but that 55% is no more the day a Section 30 is refused.

The 55% in 2014 only stands so long as the people of Scotland freely choose not to reverse it. They day they are told they can't, is the day that result ceases to be the will of the people. It is wiped from history and the dream of British unity dies.

Refusal of a Section 30 would be a knife through your heart, not mine.

The SNP have to be looking at the budget thing and thinking that if they don't get an outright majority in the next Holyrood election, or at least very close to one as per currently, then they will find being the governing party nigh on impossible.

If we went back to a "normal" situation of the Scottish Parliament (which isn't supposed to be about parties with majorities) with, say, the SNP the biggest party but only by a handful of seats then it's clear that the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems are all going to line up against them regardless of the situation. There's not going to be any sort of "well this PR system means everyone needs to work together to some extent" collegiate approach going on. The SNP will find it very difficult to get anything done even if they can form a government.

So in that respect hanging about trying to get more mandates for independence from Scottish parliament elections seems a very risky business indeed.

Having said that the words from the First Minister recently have sounded somewhat more bullish about indyref2 recently, right down to saying (if I remember rightly) that she planned an update soon pretty much regardless of where we were with Brexit, which sounded more positive.

Maybe my memory is failing me, but in, 2014 Scotland called the Indyref and only then did London offer the Edinburgh agreement.The same could happen again. Meanwhile I think the last 2 years have been a lost opportunity to inform and Educate the people. The same old scare stories will be attempted. We could have headed off and discredited most of the pro-Union arguments already.Even now questions such as currency which was a weakness in 2014 remain unanswered.We can only keep faith with the Scottish government and that the continually incompetent UK government keeps on its present path, and hope this leads us to Indyref2.A historic decision will need to be made in just 8 weeks time.

"All our 31 neighbours are wrong and stupid undemocratic fascists! Us 'now is not the time' Brenglish are super clever and democratic though; it's not us with the tinfoil hats, it's the other 31 EU+EEA members!

This reminds me of the (solid 'British') family that used to run the farm our cottage is on. We're one of around 7 houses / familes in a wee hamlet surrounded by the farm lands. Quite a variety of ages and sizes, from single younger folks, to families with kids to some older retired. We all get on really well; really lovely little community.

However, the farmer called us all neighbours from hell. He'd sold all the cottages to make some cash, but then was totally affronted that us owners acted they owned them, not him. And we were all 'neighbours from hell!' All of us LOL. Everybody was a neighbour from hell apart from his family.

This is so the UK right now.

He used to wander around pished ranting to himself as well come to think of it.

Poor jacques the trebled named frog bum boy. The Greeks got the 21st century economics lesson from the frogs and Herman Merkel. Food kitchens etc. An old nation taken tae ra cleaners and on their knees. This will not happen tae Scotland. Up yer kilts Jock crawlers.

Now this is the Cordelia we've come to know. Another night's heavy drinking brings her round to her favourite topics. My question is why would a lesbian be so fixated on "bum boys"? She's a strange one.

I was talking to a lady of 92 yesterday - she has been waiting for independence all her life. Some of us do not have the time to wait around for clement weather before having another referendum. Get on with it - that is what the SNP is meant to be for.

I have been waiting for the Glasgow Airport Rail Link to be reintroduced since the Glasgow hating Nat sis cancelled the project. They are now talking about Pods. The Greens should have demanded the reintroduction but just crawled up the Nat si erses.

"The English Taxpayer has been subsidising your pension for 23 years."

10% of the Scottish population are English, which makes this comment very anti-English, i.e. calling them subsidy junkies.

But it's not suriprising as the British are anti-English, anti-Scots, and anti-Irish. Rather obviously. You only need to see how the Brit loyalists from Ulster are happy to blackmail the English taxpayer for a £Billion to see what I mean.

The Scots/English/Welsh/Irish nats by contrast don't want a penny from their cousins in the other home nations. The subsidy junkies are the brits; it's what they vote for!

English Bob - your remark doesn't make sense. The UK pensioners all receive the same pension from the from the same purse - that's what I believed was the unionist position. If you are going to talk crap at least make it consistent crap.

A non issue. Pensions are paid for by the pensioners over their working lifetime. This was tried in the first Indyref.The DWP confirmed then that pensions to Scots would be paid as usual should Scots vote for independence. Makes a good scare story though. I'm sure you'll keep using it, you've got little else this time.

I repeat, The DWP will be liable for all current state pensions after we gain independence.Therafter the SG will pay new scottish pensions. Before the current term 'welfare' was adopted it was called national insurance which is not a benefit but a right.

So, British manufacturers will now need to set up production lines to make two versions of exactly the same product while all the neighbours only need to make one version. That will do wonders for already dire UK productivity.

"But it's just a different stamp, packaging, user manual, website description etc!" I hear a brexiter shout! Yes, it would be just this list of extra costs if the product itself is made to EU standards, as required for export. So no need to make two version of the actual product itself bar the mark of confirmity. But if the product is made to meet EU standards, then that means the EU is still making British laws, but now the UK doesn't have a say in the manufacturing standards its companies are having to conform to.

Anyway, by reducing wages British companies can cover the costs of all this. Something the Tories will be only too eager to do I imagine.

Always a problem when markets diverge, an Indy Scotland would have the same problem. But to be honest most companies don't exclusively export to EU countries, so would already have the infrastructure built in.

In terms of good to the UK, electrical power, oil and gas are Scotland's primary exports. There is conformity stamp issues for these obviously!

Certainly, brexit is a headache for Scots manufacturers who export to the rUK; Brexit hurts them just as it hurts English companies. Independence certainly doesn't solve conformity issues for Scots companies, but it makes their lives variably easier. Either way they'll have to double stamp if the want to sell to the EU and the rUK, but at least in Scotland they'll have certainty.

The UK is entering a period of new trade treaty negotiations which could last decades. We've not even started on the EU trade deal yet never mind all the others. As it stands, we're facing No deal for years until a new one can be agreed (only loons suggest we'll never have a trade deal with all 31 of our neighbours ever, so while the No deal economic disaster could last a decade or more, it's not going to be forever).

In the meantime, the UK will just have standards identical to EU ones. The EU market is far too big by comparison for this to not be the case. Other countries will not sign deals with the UK unless the UK follows EU standards.

So, an indy Scotland would be manufacturing to the CE standard for the EU and the UK, just stamping a parochial wee meaningless but costly 'UK' stamp on goods going south. However, Scotland would at least have a say on the standards as an EU member while England/Wales would not (N. Ireland is going to reunify).

But seriously, what kind of prize idiot says brexiters are utterly stupid, then proposes Scotland try to remain dependent on brexiters for its economy.

It would be utterly mad to focus on trade with the UK forward. Totally nuts. Scotland has to slash it's trade with the UK as much as possible. This is going to happen by itself of course as the English economy goes into a major brecession caused by the 'stupid brexiters'.

"But most of our trade is with titanic, and they were f'n idiots to go so fast they hit the iceberg, but now they're sinking we should stay on board."

Try arguing that on the doorsteps when people are facing empty supermarket shelves and can't get their medicine.

1) I'm nutural, I will vote for what i think is best for the country at the time of the vote.2) You focus were your main sales are, if you sell most to the UK you focus on the UK, this is basic stuff. Even in worst case scenarios exports to the UK would only drop by 5-10% and that still puts it way ahead of the EU or ROW. 3) Its neutrals like me who will decide if Scotland becomes independent or not, we are the swing votes so probably not best to call us idiots just because we don't default to Scotland good England bad to the answer for anything.

In what way?If your exports to rUK drop 10% due to Brexit, becoming independent doesn't change that, they still drop 10%. As I said this is basic stuff.

As for saying i'll make up my mind when it is time to vote, this is what neutrality is. Saying now that you would defiantly vote either yes or know when we don't even know basic facts such as hard or soft Brexit or even if there is going to be a Brexit at all seems the definition of being biased.

Personally, I'd prefer my country to be able to have a say in such things as trade negotiations, compliance regulations etc. As it stands, what is happening is completely out of Scotland's hands, and my vote utterly useless as result. When it was discovered Scotland could legally have a say on some areas due to devolution, England immeadiately power grabbed these areas so it could get a better deal for itself. Shit, with EVEL can't even elect a UK cabinet member any more, as Scots MPs can't vote on English matters (so Scots are barred from electing the PM, chancellor etc).

Meanwhile, we watch Ireland with 26 mates standing behind it and a full veto on the coming trade negotiations with the UK. It was really clever and saw that having too many eggs in the UK basket case was dumb as fk. As a result, it trades much more widely so will be hit by the brexit clusterfuck much less.

It's an absolute no brainer for me.

Let the country next door run my country or the government I elect do this? Hmmm, tough one. Forgive me if I do what normal people all over the globle do and opt for independence.

skier is Soros funding you. I go to the pub come back and you have commented. I go for a crap come back and you have commented. I go to my scratcher wake up and you have commented. You are the best thing that ever happened for us Brit Scots. Cheers chin chin.

The polls show an 'overwhelming majority' for independence if brexit goes ahead with May's deal (53% Yes), with an epic landslide 59% Yes in the case of no deal. And that's from rather Yes unfriendly panelbase.

While heathly adults should get by ok, a lack of food and medicines may well kill the young, elderly and infirm. So, let's not even consider 'no deal' please brexiters. Murdering people over this isn't an option.

Colostomy bags to be emptied once a week and vegetables forbidden. Face masks and ether issued. Palative care homes issue imminent death warning. Rich Scottish pensioners move to German holiday camps in Poland. Anything is better than leaving the EU.

The international community is looking on at the backstop debate and asking 'Why is England demanding to decide the future of N. Ireland when the UN peace deal GFA clearly states that this for the people of the N&S of Ireland to decide together alone?'

England does not get to decide whether it is sticking to the GFA. Nor does Ireland or N. Ireland. It is all the neighbours that decide this, and these that apply the sancitons for breaching it. Not letting the people of N. Ireland decide on the backstop themselves is a very obvious breach.

Often wonder why you want referendums. Is it something to do with the results you do not like? And this so called backstop is a farce and yet you support it. The Belfast Agreement if honoured by both sides settles the issue. Unfortunately the ROI is no longer a nation state and is governed by the EU.

Well, well. Cordelia lasted a lot longer on the booze last night than I would have thought humanly possible. I'm not 100% sure what point she was trying to make at ten to four this morning, but I'm sure it was fascinating.

Looks like the economy may well have already stalled or entered contraction.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47127927

UK economy ‘stalls’ over Brexit and global economy fears

The UK's service sector stagnated last month, with new orders falling for the first time in two-and-a-half years, according to the IHS Markit/CIPS purchasing managers' index (PMI).

The figures showed a reading of 50.1 in January, lower than December's 51.2.

IHS Markit's Chris Williamson said the results indicated that the UK economy "is at risk of stalling or worse".

He said this was because of growing Brexit uncertainty coinciding with a wider slowdown in the global economy.

The SNP won a landslide in 2011 on the back of high unemployment and a double dip UK government caused recession. By the time 2014 came, the economy was in recovery and unemployment falling. This was probably the biggest boost the pro-UK campaign could get, and it probably just saved the union.

For #iref2, the UK needs a new economic boom to have any hope of victory. However, as it stands, we are heading for potential contraction.

Rising umployment (it's been edging up in England) is an incredibly hard sell, particulary as wages have never recovered to pre-2008 levels.

As the old saying goes, 'It's the economy stupid!'. Unionists should pray that we are heading for a major boom because without that, they're in serious s**t. Brexit is already hurting them big style never mind a significant economic hit.

"The SNP won a landslide in 2011 on the back of high unemployment and a double dip UK government caused recession."

Hm, massive recession #1 ended in 2010 which is, well, not long before 2011. Then talk began of second recession began to heat up in 2011 (which saw two very weak quarters), and this duly arrived in 2012; giving us the imfamous 'double dip'*.

Seems to me that means 2011 was 'riding the back of a double dip recession'.

Unemployment was rising throughout the period in question, peaking in 2012 at 8.5%. Only after this did contractions stop and unemployment start to fall as the recovery proper took hold ahead of 2014.

So my post stands.

---*https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17836624

UK economy in double-dip recession

Although it turned to not be a recession, but two seperate contraction events in the same year.

2010 was the first year to not to show recession after the 2008-09 recession. The 2008-9 recession had ended by 2010. By 2010, the 2009-10 recession had ended. 2010 saw the first full year of growth after the 2008-2009 recession. In 2010, the 2008-9 recession had finished.

But since my post was completely right in that the SNP rode to victory on the back of a serious UK economic situation, then Yes saw this reversed into an uphill struggle against a recovery, let's just be pedantic about wording eh!

Unless we see a boom going forward, the unionists will face the uphill struggle this time, and they're starting from 53% this time tomorrow (not nearly 70%), and from behind if brexit goes ahead.

In dire economic situations, people always look for a way out. The more dire, the more likely they are to opt for more 'radical' changes.

If the UK economy goes into recession again yet wages have never recovered from the last one, then folks can conclude the UK is a failure and it's time to try something new. They damn near concluded that last time.

Unionists need a major economic boom now and one that lasts for 5-10 years at least.

While the financial crisis was aknowledged as being a wider problem and therefore somewhat outwith the UK's control, brexit is 100% at the door of the UK union.

Every single job loss arising from it etc will be directly due to Scotland being in the union with England. No question about it.

It won't be blamed on the Tories, because brexit isn't just about them - Jeremy's right there with them on it! It won't be blamed on the wider world economy because everyone knows brexit is its own wee special great British fuck up. Nope, the business/worker brexodus that's now well underway....the coming major recession leading to long term decline...the unending political instability...the rise of extreme right...all the things the UK government is warning us about... will all be the direct result of UK unionism.

And there's only one way out of this in the eyes of the electorate.

Which is why polls show a Yes if brexit goes ahead, and that's while people are only just getting the first little whiffs of the shit as it flies at 100 miles an hour towards the industrial scale screw-up fan. Just wait until the crap actually impacts!

The rights of Irish in N. Ireland are fully protected by the GFA. These are not British people, but Irish N. Irish living in the land of their birth where their families have live going back into history. The GFA reflects this, guaranteeing their rights under a range of European conventions.

So, as it stands, an Irish person either side of the border can freely marry and live with another EU citizen. No visas needed. This is protected by the GFA.

But what about post-brexit? Irish in N. Ireland must still be able to bring their e.g. french wife freely to live with them. Visas can't be demanded (never mind refused) by the English gestapo as that would create a 'hard border', in this case for the free movement of Irish citizens and their families.

But this needs to go further, as we can't stop Irish people bringing extended family into N. Ireland freely. And they should not have to be married either; if an Irishman has a French girlfriend, she should be able to live and work in the north visa free or the GFA is broken as it creates a hard border, taking away the rights of Irish N. Irish.

What about the EU friends of Irish people in N. Ireland? They should be able to travel freely into the N. for dinner with Irish friends without any visa? If they need a visa when they did not previously, then there must now be a hard border. The GFA is broken by England.

Which is why this issue cannot be resolved, even by technology. Tech might solve the trade, maybe, but it cannot solve the people issue. If the Polish friend of Irishman needs a visa to vist the Irishman's house, then that is the English gestapo now monitoring the Irishman and restricting his rights with a hard border.

And if full free movement is allow for N. Ireland, it must be allowed for Scotland..or Wales..if these wish it. It would be a racist breach of rights to give special advantages to one nationality in the UK in terms of who they can live with etc but not give that to others. Unless we are to argue that N Ireland is 'different because of the violence', in which case we justify violence to obtain better rights.

This is the can of worms that brexit opens. It can't be fixed either; Brexiters can only lose in court on this one. Only staying in the single market with full free movement can preserve the GFA and the UK union as a whole.

It is that or the border moves to it's rightful place in the Irish sea.

skier, It is the Belfast Agreement made in Hillsborough Castle. Why do you insist on the Good Friday Agreement. Not all Irish or British are Christians. Maybe you have come under the influence of Pope Blair 1st.

England [and therefore the UK via Westsminster] is a theocracy where unelected bishops sit in its upper parliament chamber making laws, while the head of state is also head of the 'official' church; the church of England. As a result, Good Friday (19th April) is a public holiday. The agreement was concluded on good Friday.

Scotland by contrast is secluar; there are no unelected clergy in Holyrood nor is the head of state head of any Scottish church.

One of the reasons I support independence is to completely remove the link between church and state that being part of the UK union involves.

'Great Britain' is the larger (Greater / Great) of the two main islands of the geographical 'British Isles'. This geographic name gives the name to the UKofGB; the union between Scotland and England, circa 1707->.

‘Britain’ was the geographic name originally given by the Romans to England & Wales, Scotland being Caledonia.

The current peace process began with signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, 1985. Scotland isn’t 'Anglo'; that being England, i.e. the English-Irish Agreement, 1985.

Here is is; the ‘English’ part right on the front page. Very obvious this is not ‘the UK’!

Note the lack of a new name this time, as it is simply a continuation of the English-Irish peace process. It has been referred to as the ‘British-Irish’ agreement, which relates it to the Kingdom of England (and Wales). The term ‘Great’ has never been used to include Scotland.

Because foreign affairs are a ‘reserved matter’, i.e. not dealt with by devolved parliaments or secretaries of state / home nation offices previous to this, then these agreements were signed by the ‘UK government’ acting on behalf of England.

If Scotland were in conflict with another country (e.g. some legal conflict under Scots law, such as concerning a sea border), the same would apply. Sturgeon would not sign the peace deal, May would, as this is a reserved matter.

Remember, only British/English terrorists have attacked Scotland, never the IRA. The latter only attacked the ‘enemy country’, i.e. England.

This is the point where Cordelia laughed along with the furniture, screamed at the cat for voting Remain, then fell into its favourite cupboard.It then fell asleep, clutching its knees and sobbing with unrequited love for whichever rancid gammon was ranting on the TV last night.Still, it'll be back today, raging hangover and all, to tell us more about its bizarre tastes and warped prejudices in far too much detail.

Tusk is merely stating the bald truth - Brexit has been nothing but a long, sad, ignorant and vexatious LIE from start to finish, promoted and led by THE biggest bunch of duplicitous morons ever seen in these islands.

Tusk is only openly stating what the leaders/govt of just about every single country in the World is thinking, apart from that other noted moron in the White House.

As usual, though, the millionaires/billionaires who are heading the Brexshit Shambles have ALREADY moved most of their wealth into Europe or elsewhere, to completely avoid the catastrophic fall-out and only the poor, wee, deluded "common people" will have to carry the can with a rapid increase in unemployment, food shortages/rationing, medicine scarcity, needless restrictions on travel and even the possibility of Martial Law and Curfews.

You can rest assured, though, that the Slugs who were "in charge" of this utter mess, will NOT.

The imperial snowflakes really didn't like what Donald Tusk had to say. It was entertaining watching them howl with indignation over a wee insult after years of comparing the EU with the Napoleonic Empire and the Third Reich.

I have read that the Germans had a beer hall putsch i think that is a good idea glasgow has plenty of pubs and we get to have some fun drinking beer as well while doing something for scotland. Whos with me? We can march on the englisch and demand indyref2 and if they wont give it to us we can take london by force its going to be thirsty work marching to london tho so thats why we need to start in the pubs. Most of the pubs these days serve food as well so we can get a wee bite to eat before we go. Whose with me? The scottish beer hall putsch of 2019 YAAAAAASS!!! Here we here we here we f#@$¥€g go!!!

Will also save money on any new visa system. Nae need for this unless the goal is to make leaving illegal.

Buy aye, let's rant 'We don't want your sort here and you've got to be earning 30k to get in!' at the crowds cramming the exit gates. That seems like an eminently clever policy for 'global Britain'.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47002618

Brexit: UK jobs 'attracting less interest from EU workers'

UK jobs are attracting less interest from other European workers, figures released by some of the world's largest job search engines suggest.

Data analysed for BBC News by jobs site Indeed show the number of searches for UK jobs from other European countries has fallen since 2015.

The construction and healthcare industries have been the hardest hit...

...Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) also shows that the number of non-UK nationals from the EU working in the UK dropped by 132,000 in the three months to September 2018 compared with 2017. That's the largest annual fall since comparable records began in 1997.

When are we going to get indyref2 i really really want it this is getting SO FRUSTRATING!!! We should have it now.what about that tory that was caught feeling guys up we could use that as the trigger for indy i am so so angry for our poor SMP Mps they have to put up with so much bullying now they have to tolerate their balls being felt by tories. It's infuriating.